{"id":17429,"date":"2012-10-23T10:15:04","date_gmt":"2012-10-23T15:15:04","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/?p=17429"},"modified":"2012-10-23T10:15:04","modified_gmt":"2012-10-23T15:15:04","slug":"canadas-foreign-investment-net-benefit-test-is-a-farce","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/2012\/10\/23\/canadas-foreign-investment-net-benefit-test-is-a-farce\/","title":{"rendered":"Canada’s foreign investment “net benefit” test is a farce"},"content":{"rendered":"

Andrew Coyne<\/a> scrambles to find the right words to describe the indescribable:<\/p>\n

The existing rules, as readers will know, require that a foreign takeover be of \u201cnet benefit\u201d to Canada. How this is to be demonstrated, how it is even defined, is a secret to which the bidder is not privy \u2014 understandably enough, since it is not known to the government either. The result may be compared to a game of blind man\u2019s bluff, only with both players wearing blindfolds. The bidder makes repeated attempts to hit the mark, while the government shouts encouragingly, \u201cwarmer\u2026 \u201d or \u201ccooler\u2026\u201d depending on its best guess of where the target happens to be at the time.<\/p>\n

I\u2019m joking, of course. In fact, there\u2019s a perfectly clear<\/em> definition of \u201cnet benefit.\u201d As set out in section 20 of the Investment Canada Act, the minister is required to take into account the effect of the investment on \u201cthe level and nature of economic activity in Canada,\u201d specifically (but \u201cwithout limiting the generality of the foregoing\u201d) \u201con employment, on resource processing, on the utilization of parts, components and services produced in Canada and on exports from Canada.\u201d Clear enough, right?<\/p>\n

[. . .]<\/p>\n

All told, I count more than 20 different criteria to be applied, vague, elusive and contradictory as they are. Whether it is possible to measure even one of them in any objective fashion, still less all of them at the same time, may be doubted \u2014 but even if you could, the Act provides no benchmark of what is acceptable, separately or collectively. Neither does it say what weight should be given to each in the minister\u2019s calculations, or even whether he strictly has to pay any of them any mind at all (\u201cthe factors to be taken into account, where relevant<\/em>, are\u2026\u201d).<\/p>\n

In other words, the whole thing is a charade, applying a veneer of objectivity to what remains an entirely subjective \u2014 not to say opaque, arbitrary and meaningless \u2014 process. Which is good, since any attempt to define such benchmarks, weights, etc would be even more arbitrary and meaningless. Because there isn\u2019t any objective definition of \u201cnet benefit,\u201d at least in the sense implied, nor is it necessary to invent one. We don\u2019t need to clarify the net benefit test. We need to abolish it.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Andrew Coyne scrambles to find the right words to describe the indescribable: The existing rules, as readers will know, require that a foreign takeover be of \u201cnet benefit\u201d to Canada. How this is to be demonstrated, how it is even defined, is a secret to which the bidder is not privy \u2014 understandably enough, since […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,831,6,84],"tags":[52,571,656,266,661],"class_list":["post-17429","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bureaucracy","category-business","category-cancon","category-government","tag-absurd","tag-investment","tag-malaysia","tag-protectionism","tag-regulation"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p2hpV6-4x7","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17429","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=17429"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17429\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":17430,"href":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17429\/revisions\/17430"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=17429"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=17429"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=17429"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}